Anonymous wrote:

I live in virginia and I support this bill.. I understand that there are casea such as life and death or medical reasons fir having an abortion but there are also too many doin it out of convenience because either they don't want a child at that time or because of educational goals etc... and in my opinion if ur not ready for a child then the proper procedure needs to be takin so that the pregnancy doesn't occur in the first place....I got pregnant at 19 and was attending college and my pregnancy happened because I didn't use protection but I kept her and has raised her and I am almost done with school although it has takin longer and is harder

Good for you for pursuing your educational goals and for raising your daughter. I am sure that things were not easy for you. I also have many relatives who became pregnant before they planned to be pregnant. Sometimes there was drug addiction, alcoholism, lack of educational and professional goals which combined to make their lives especially difficult. My relatives were brought up in a very religious household and it abortion was something that was definitely not on the table. Many, although they have limited means, put their money where their mouth is (unlike so many others) and actually donate some of the little money they have for pro-life groups that help young mothers without means.

I, however, disagree that abortion should not be available for women who decide that this is the option they would rather take. I think this decision is hard for almost every woman. To call it "convenient" however, is a misnomer. Having a child completely changes your life, your priorities, your time availability, etc. "Convenience" is waiting in Starbucks for a cup of coffee rather than make your own. If the thought of having a child rests on a thought of "convenience" then such a person would 1) either make a horrible parent or 2) is re-defining the word, "convenient," to mean the complete opposite. I am currently pregnant, and very happily so, and while I wish I had more ducks lined in a row before I have the baby, I would never, absolutely NEVER, consider that "convenience" would be a factor in almost any woman's decision to have an abortion.

I honor and respect your decision, as I would also honor and respect other women's decisions. It is extremely personal. But abortion should be an option. And yes, I also believe, more efforts should be done to prevent pregnancies in the first place. But not through force as outlawing it would do.

I was curious about how Plan B -- or emergency contraception -- worked. I had thought that it prevented implantation, but it apparently works differently -- or at least it can prevent pregnancies in other ways. Unlike usual contraception, this is taken within 72 hours AFTER sex.

"How does emergency contraception work?
The pill versions of emergency contraception work by either delaying or preventing ovulation, and perhaps by altering a woman’s cervical mucus to create a hostile environment for sperm. A copper IUD prevents fertilization and also probably the implantation of a fertilized egg in the uterus. Emergency contraception is therefore not an abortion, since it prevents, rather than ends, a pregnancy."

http://www.healthline.com/health/emergency-contraception/overview

But then another site, the FDA, includes the implantation prevention as part of the way it could work. So, I guess it could do both -- 1) prevent the sperm and egg from joining or 2) if they do meet, to prevent it from implantation.

3. How does Plan B work?

"Plan B works like other birth control pills to prevent pregnancy. Plan B acts primarily by stopping the release of an egg from the ovary (ovulation). It may prevent the union of sperm and egg (fertilization). If fertilization does occur, Plan B may prevent a fertilized egg from attaching to the womb (implantation). If a fertilized egg is implanted prior to taking Plan B, Plan B will not work."

http://www.fda.gov/drugs/drugsafety/postmarketdrugsafetyinformationforpatientsandproviders/ucm109795.htm

I've only done 15 minutes of research on this, so I am not sure about what rate the emergency contraception works in one way versus another, but the Personhood Amendment would end this, if the Supreme Court found it to be constitutional.

As for previous comments about when life starts. Sure, I would agree that when an egg and a sperm meet, there is something that happens. But the egg and the sperm were already alive. 15 million (?) sperm (sometimes minus 1) die each time a man ejaculates. And every month (sometimes minus 1), an egg dies. When they meet, the process of life begins, but to consider that a "person" with equal rights is ridiculous.

I would agree that something special and magical happens when sperm and egg meet, but it is not a "person" -- it will, however, develop into a person given the right conditions.

Please note also that lots of other things are life -- one-celled organisms, bacteria, yeast, ants, dust mites -- are also life. To say that an egg and sperm, even when separated are not alive is a falsehood. But to say it is a "person" with rested rights is an extreme statement.

I want to write extremely snarky things about 11:22, but mostly, I just feel pity that she's so ill-informed about her reproductive options.

Anonymous wrote:Another possible confusion from this bill - if personhood begins at conception, does that mean that when you give birth your baby is actually nine months old? It sounds silly, but kids would be going to school nine months earlier and be able to drive, smoke, and drink almost a year before they currently can under VA state law. I don't know about you, but the idea of a 14 year old with a learner's permit is pretty scary...

As so many posters have pointed out, taking personhood at conception to its logical extent will all accompanying remifications shows just how ridiculous and dangerous this law is. Proponents may scoff at these 'extreme examples', but this is an extreme infringement on women's rights.

no because they go by birth date

Rhythm method wouldn't work for me id forget to the timing... so the morning after pill prevents attachment then? I don't really know much about it just what I have heard from a woman at the health department she said it was considered an abortive method ... I don't keep track of this stuff anymore

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Plan B is safe. And it is considered birth control, as it PREVENTS CONCEPTION, like other forms of birth control, including the rhythm method. It will not work if someone is already pregnant.

Ok so this may sound stupid but I'm not ashamed to ask questions but what is the rhythm method? And I know that about the morning after pill but they still consider it an abortive method

nevermind I googled it

Another possible confusion from this bill - if personhood begins at conception, does that mean that when you give birth your baby is actually nine months old? It sounds silly, but kids would be going to school nine months earlier and be able to drive, smoke, and drink almost a year before they currently can under VA state law. I don't know about you, but the idea of a 14 year old with a learner's permit is pretty scary...

As so many posters have pointed out, taking personhood at conception to its logical extent will all accompanying remifications shows just how ridiculous and dangerous this law is. Proponents may scoff at these 'extreme examples', but this is an extreme infringement on women's rights.

The rhythm method aka natural family planning, aka timed intercourse.

Who is this "they" that consider Plan B an abortion? Groups with ulterior motives, with histories of using misinformation to deceive women? Plan B is emergency contraception. Seems pretty straightforward to me.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Plan B is safe. And it is considered birth control, as it PREVENTS CONCEPTION, like other forms of birth control, including the rhythm method. It will not work if someone is already pregnant.

Ok so this may sound stupid but I'm not ashamed to ask questions but what is the rhythm method? And I know that about the morning after pill but they still consider it an abortive method

The rhythm method is timing sex to avoid conception. Advocated by the Catholic Church as an alternative to birth control, though it is, in fact, designed to prevent conception and therefore is technically birth control, no matter how they try to spin it. Like 98% of all other Catholic women, I've chosen to use more reliable methods, as I believe God wants me to exercise the judgment and reason He gave me.

Please, for the love of God, stop listening to "THEM" about what the morning after pill is. It is NOT AN ABORTION. It will NOT work if you are already pregnant. It will NOT terminate a pregnancy.

There is fact, and there is opinion. This country would be a lot better off if people knew the difference.

Anonymous wrote:Plan B is safe. And it is considered birth control, as it PREVENTS CONCEPTION, like other forms of birth control, including the rhythm method. It will not work if someone is already pregnant.

Ok so this may sound stupid but I'm not ashamed to ask questions but what is the rhythm method? And I know that about the morning after pill but they still consider it an abortive method

Anonymous wrote:Well good for you. But what works for you doesn't work for everyone. So why don't you take your holier-than-thou attitude and stop judging other women for the choices they make.

And spare me the "too many doin[sic] it out of convenience" line or garbage that gets trotted out.

If you put half as much effort into school as you put into attempting to shame women who made reproductive choices you disagree with, your most might be readable. As it is, it looks like something a barely educated 15 year old would come up with.

I don't see where I have judged anybody I never once discriminated against anybody or condemned anyone. I am not giving no "holier-than-thou" attitude I stated my opinion such as anybody else did and I did not attack anyone for their comments.

Plan B is safe. And it is considered birth control, as it PREVENTS CONCEPTION, like other forms of birth control, including the rhythm method. It will not work if someone is already pregnant.

Anonymous wrote:9:43, do you even understand what the bill is? Based on your response, I don't think you do. It's about making the fertilized zygote a person. That means that, yes, abortion would become illegal, but there's more to it than that: forms of birth control would become illegal (so there goes your arguement that proper procedures need to be taken to prevent pregnancy), couples who want to use IVF would be unable to, and a whole host of legal issues would come up.

Good for you for choosing to keep your child and raise her. But do not pass your judgements on other women who make different choices. What was good for you is not good for everyone, and a little perspective will help your daughter down the line.

I do know what the bill is and I am one that does believe life begins at conception cells are the smallest form of life and I'm not passing judgement on anyone I have a friend that has had three abortions which altho I don't like it I don't judge her for what she did and it only bans some forms of birthcontrol not all of them only such forms such as the morning after... most of the birth control pills are safe...

https://secure2.convio.net/res/site/Advocacy?cmd=display&page=UserAction&id=393

Help Stop Personhood Bill in Senate

Tthe Virginia House of Delegates overwhelmingly passed HB1—the Virginia Personhood Bill. Personhood Bills endanger the practice of IVF and the treatment of infertility. If an embryo is defined as a person and is given the same rights as a person this could make it nearly impossible for doctors to practice IVF in the Commonwealth of Virginia. Doctors and patients could be held criminally liable for anything that happens to that embryo. RESOLVE is opposed to ALL Personhood Bills. Please fill out the form below and send a letter to your state senator telling them to say NO to HB 1.

Thank you!

Well good for you. But what works for you doesn't work for everyone. So why don't you take your holier-than-thou attitude and stop judging other women for the choices they make.

And spare me the "too many doin[sic] it out of convenience" line or garbage that gets trotted out.

If you put half as much effort into school as you put into attempting to shame women who made reproductive choices you disagree with, your most might be readable. As it is, it looks like something a barely educated 15 year old would come up with.